+1
As a web developer that's spent a lot of time experimenting with the
currently specified version of the WebRTC related APIs and that's been
following the mailing list debates closely this really does seem like
the best resolution.
It provides a more extensible and flexible architecture that can evolve
at "web developer speed" not "aligned browser release speed". And at
this speed it will also be less fragile.
It provides a clear separation of concerns so people can use SDP where
they want, but not everyone is restricted by the timelines of other WGs
that are required to evolve SDP.
And it would enable even more experimentation and future facing
development too.
Also, in terms of timing I think getting this right is more important
than the current commitment to a deadline.
This is from the perspective of a web developer that has gone to all the
effort of just finishing a book on "Getting started with WebRTC" using
the existing API and who is also working on several commercial projects
based on the current API.
So if anyone should be promoting "just get the first version out" then
it should be someone in my position. But I think you really will find
that most web developers would rather we got this abstraction right
first so we can avoid all of the extra support issues and application
re-work that will be required down the track if we don't.
roBman
On 20/07/13 23:51, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Let W3C experts to define a good JS API for WebRTC (with no SDP), let
> MMUSIC WG to define a SDP format for WebRTC, and then let JavaScript SIP
> experts to build JS libraries on top of it to play the SDP game, and we
> all will be happy. And telcos will be much more happy than they think.
> Let's get rid of all the SDP O/A stuff in the browser. The browser is
> not a phone and "fixed logic + fixed code" does not work here.